Suit alleges Toronto stole idea for sign
The city of Toronto is facing a $ 2.5- million lawsuit over its iconic city hall sign.
The large, multi- coloured block letters have become a fixture at Nathan Phillips Square, outside city hall, ever since they were unveiled as part of the Pan Am and Parapan Am Games last summer.
They have been lit up in the colours of the French flag to mourn terrorist attacks in Paris, gone green for St. Paddy’s Day and turned off to mourn the March 22 death of former mayor Rob Ford.
But a lawsuit claims that the city, Mayor John Tory and city councillors Josh Colle and Michael Thompson stole the idea for the sign from Bruce Barrow, a brand-marketing expert.
A spokesperson for the municipality says there is “no basis for this claim” and it is being “vigorously defended.” The municipality’s counterclaim notes the city first started talking about building a sign for the Pan Am Games in 2010, but it was going to say “xoTO” instead of “Toronto.”
Barrow’s suit claims he first communicated his idea for a large, all-caps “Toronto” sign to Colle in December 2013, requesting a meeting that eventually took place March 4, 2014. That’s when he says he presented his pitch for a new “CityBrand concept” that would include a sign, with LED lights, that would be built at a major landmark — likely city hall — and would be unveiled as part of the Pan Am Games.
He says he later reached out to Thompson, a city employee and Tory, when the mayor was still just a mayoral candidate, but never got a commitment or any money from the city.
On Jan. 14, 2015, Barrow emailed city officials to ask about his pitch, his suit claims. He heard nothing back. Six days later, on Jan. 20, the city posted a request for proposals for someone to build a sign just like the one he proposed, he says.
“At no point prior to the meeting, during the meeting or following the meeting … did (anyone) say to the plain- tiff that the city was developing or having a third party develop, a new branding concept similar to the plaintiff ’s CityBrand concept,” the statement of claim, filed Jan. 5 in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, reads.
“The city did not and could not have developed the T- O- R- O- N-T- O sign brandi ng concept without the benefit of the confidential information” Barrow offered the defendants, the suit alleges.
None of the allegations has been tested in court and the named defendants declined to comment outside of the city’s official statement.
The statement of defence, filed Feb. 19, argues the sign’s concept is nothing new, and therefore the suit should be dismissed: “Interactive, t hree- dimensional signs bearing the name of a city are commonplace around the world. They can be found in Amsterdam, Guadalajara, Budapest and most recently, in Toronto.”
The statement of defence notes Tory never requested a copy of Barrow’s presentation in his emails from the campaign trail, and says city employees developed the sign idea themselves over the months leading up to the games.
“The TORONTO sign is the product of the city’s independent work,” the document reads. “It is completely different in terms of use, size, purpose and esthetics.”
Barrow and his lawyer, John Simpson of Shift Law, allege it’s not just the idea of the sign, but the very execu- tion of the “BrandCity” concept that Toronto officials “appropriated.”
Barrow says he proposed the campaign and its sign be linked to the Pan Am Games and suggested the possibility of moving the display around in the future — something Tory has mused about. The city’s defence says this was “always a part” of the plan for the Toronto sign.
The suit alleges Barrow lost out on compensation and royalties for his idea, suffered as a result of that loss, and has been “deprived of … a significant boost to his professional reputation.”
However, the city’s statement of claim says, “The CityBrand presentation lacks originality as it merely copies ideas used in other cities.”